2019-20 CHL SP Game Used Preview & Checklist

[30ranfordfan]

I think they can... They just have to bid for the rights and if they lose then file an anti-trust lawsuit against Upper Deck declaring them a monopoly...

If I was the president of Leaf/ITG I would do just that...

And I know a bit about litigation, ITG would win for numerous reasons... One could argue that there is collusion with UD...

You mean like the anti-trust lawsuit that's ongoing?

Leaf and UD are already suing each other.......


And no, they don't have to simply bid. That assumes that the NHL (and PA) are looking for another company to sell the rights to.

The NHL has had Upper Deck as an exclusive rights holder for most of the last 15 years. There was a small window (2010, to 2014, I think?) when Panini had a license too. The NHL then reverted back to an exclusive deal with UD.

When you consider that all four major pro-team sports in North America have exclusive trading card deals, it's clearly not a "the NHLPA is short sighted" thing. It's that the leagues (or the PAs, and it's most likely the PAs) would rather deal with one manufacture than multiple manufactures. It's simpler for them.

Even in the hypothetical situation where the NHL & PA were looking to license another manufacturer.... I'm not sure Leaf would be #1 on the list (in fact, I think they probably would not be). I'm not sure they'd even be 2nd on the list. I'm not knocking their stuff at all.... I really like a lot of their products.... but if there is going to be a 2nd licensed manufacturer, I think both Topps and Panini stand better chances of getting that spot than Leaf.

And yeah.... as I think has been pointed out: This is a CHL set (i.e. Juniors. Players who have not been drafted). Upper Deck has had this license for a few years now, not Leaf. Same with the AHL. Leaf only has licensing from individual players.

[cygnusx1]

I mean name the last star player that spent an entire year in the AHL before they went on to be an NHL star? if I cant name one you can't, lol...

Brad Marchand
Mika Zibanejad
John Carlson
JT Miller
Kyle Connor

Pretty sure Kucherov and Panarin spent time there as well... this is just from taking a quick glance at the top scorers in the league lol. I can't imagine passionately writing a 12 paragraph essay but not knowing what I'm talking about

[MR.M's Cards]

Brad Marchand
Mika Zibanejad
John Carlson
JT Miller
Kyle Connor

Pretty sure Kucherov and Panarin spent time there as well... this is just from taking a quick glance at the top scorers in the league lol. I can't imagine passionately writing a 12 paragraph essay but not knowing what I'm talking about

you cheated, he only asked for one :)

[Savard18]

Brad Marchand
Mika Zibanejad
John Carlson
JT Miller
Kyle Connor

Pretty sure Kucherov and Panarin spent time there as well... this is just from taking a quick glance at the top scorers in the league lol. I can't imagine passionately writing a 12 paragraph essay but not knowing what I'm talking about

Dude, my point is going over your head.... And if it matters - Panarin never spent a day in the AHL.. He was signed to a 1-way contract, but was was treated as an ELC for cap purposes, but it was actually a SPC (all non-drafted Euros get the same deal after they're no longer draft eligible, but I think after the age of 27 they're treated as UFA's) - he had an "opt out" clause that essentially stated if the Hawks sent him down to the AHL he could return to the KHL.

Non-drafted Euro contracts are too complicated to explain in a post... They're treated as ELC's under the CBA, but they're not ELC's - they're SPC's and the player essentially has all the advantages of a UFA... Now I believe after the age of 27 a non-drafted or non-tendered Euro is a UFA hence he doesn't have to sign a ELC - which is really a SPC... There are a few players in the KHL that know this and once they turn 27 they will come to North America to play (well maybe not now considering the cap is flat)..

What was that Russian dudes name that played for Vegas? I forgot his name but he's a good example of what I'm talking about - he was assigned to the Chicago Wolves for a few games to start the season so the Knights could do some juggling of players and contracts and he split because he didn't understand...

Either way, not many star players/impact players play in the AHL... Sure ever squirrel finds a nut but the majority of AHL players that are good enough to play in the NHL are your typical 3rd or 4th line players that are "meat and potatoes" type players.. Sure some will stick and may even move up to the 2nd line and get an opportunity to play some offense, but 90% wont...

And even these dudes have been "unsteady" to say the least..

Mika Zibanejad
John Carlson
JT Miller
Kyle Connor

They're perfect examples of what I just said... But for every one of those guys there are 100 more that was never given the opportunity. I mean you can throw Cheechoo, Gomez, Havlat (too many to list really) etc in there if you want, lol.... I mean if it was 5 years ago you would have said "Andrew Hammond"....

Look, my point is that you're not going to see star players generally speaking (typing) developing in the AHL... Usually they will get their 9 games, if they don't work out or still need to develop after those 9 games a team will send them back to the CHL and not burn a year off his ELC - said player will be sent back to their junior clubs, and 90% of the time after a year they're ready for the NHL...Of course I'm talking about stars and superstars here not "meat and potatoes" bottom 6 role players, grinders or PK specialists or a #6 or 7 defensman..... Goalies will develop in the AHL tho, goalies don't just jump from the CHL to the NHL anymore ... The last goalie that did that was Tom Barrasso but he wen't straight from high school to the NHL, won the Calder and the Jennings or Conn Smythe I think back in 1983....But that was a different era entirely and you will never see that again... Sure, some 18 or 19-year-old goalies may get an emergency call up but the kid could have a 60 save shutout and he would still be sent back down for development... I remember Michael Leighton or Craig Anderson doing that for the Hawks in his first game - first NHL start a SO and he didn't play for a while after that...

[cygnusx1]

What IS your point? If someone gives you an example, you just reject it by making up your own reasons as to why the example is not valid. Nearly 90% of all players who played in the NHL this year have spent time in the AHL. Let me guess..... those 90% must all be backup goalies and 3rd/4th liners, right?

[30ranfordfan]

Dude, my point is going over your head.... And if it matters - Panarin never spent a day in the AHL.. He was signed to a 1-way contract, but was was treated as an ELC for cap purposes, but it was actually a SPC (all non-drafted Euros get the same deal after they're no longer draft eligible, but I think after the age of 27 they're treated as UFA's) - he had an "opt out" clause that essentially stated if the Hawks sent him down to the AHL he could return to the KHL.

Non-drafted Euro contracts are too complicated to explain in a post... They're treated as ELC's under the CBA, but they're not ELC's - they're SPC's and the player essentially has all the advantages of a UFA... Now I believe after the age of 27 a non-drafted or non-tendered Euro is a UFA hence he doesn't have to sign a ELC - which is really a SPC... There are a few players in the KHL that know this and once they turn 27 they will come to North America to play (well maybe not now considering the cap is flat)..

What was that Russian dudes name that played for Vegas? I forgot his name but he's a good example of what I'm talking about - he was assigned to the Chicago Wolves for a few games to start the season so the Knights could do some juggling of players and contracts and he split because he didn't understand...

Either way, not many star players/impact players play in the AHL... Sure ever squirrel finds a nut but the majority of AHL players that are good enough to play in the NHL are your typical 3rd or 4th line players that are "meat and potatoes" type players.. Sure some will stick and may even move up to the 2nd line and get an opportunity to play some offense, but 90% wont...

And even these dudes have been "unsteady" to say the least..

Mika Zibanejad
John Carlson
JT Miller
Kyle Connor

They're perfect examples of what I just said... But for every one of those guys there are 100 more that was never given the opportunity. I mean you can throw Cheechoo, Gomez, Havlat (too many to list really) etc in there if you want, lol.... I mean if it was 5 years ago you would have said "Andrew Hammond"....

Look, my point is that you're not going to see star players generally speaking (typing) developing in the AHL... Usually they will get their 9 games, if they don't work out or still need to develop after those 9 games a team will send them back to the CHL and not burn a year off his ELC - said player will be sent back to their junior clubs, and 90% of the time after a year they're ready for the NHL...Of course I'm talking about stars and superstars here not "meat and potatoes" bottom 6 role players, grinders or PK specialists or a #6 or 7 defensman..... Goalies will develop in the AHL tho, goalies don't just jump from the CHL to the NHL anymore ... The last goalie that did that was Tom Barrasso but he wen't straight from high school to the NHL, won the Calder and the Jennings or Conn Smythe I think back in 1983....But that was a different era entirely and you will never see that again... Sure, some 18 or 19-year-old goalies may get an emergency call up but the kid could have a 60 save shutout and he would still be sent back down for development... I remember Michael Leighton or Craig Anderson doing that for the Hawks in his first game - first NHL start a SO and he didn't play for a while after that...

This lookup is kind of biased against dmen, but a quick look at the top 25 scorers in this NHL for 19-20, 11 of them spent time in the AHL. Not all spent a long time there, but some time. 11/25 is not an insignificant percentage..... it's nearly half.

Most players don't jump from being drafted at 18, right into the NHL..... but they don't go to the AHL either. European teenagers are more likely to stay home for another couple of years, and North American ones that are playing Major Junior have to be sent back there, they can't be assigned to the AHL until they're 20. The college kids typically stay in school until they're ready to sign a contract, so they might play there for another couple of seasons.... or they sign right away, which means they've got a spot on the NHL team, or they sign the deal and play Major Junior.

Most NHLers spent time in the minors. Many stars did as well. I would agree with you that a majority of the top talent in the league don't play in the AHL, but it's a small majority.

I guess it depends on what level of "star" player you're talking about. If you're looking at active NHLers, who are already considered locks to be inducted into the HOF one day.... without looking it up, I'd suggest your point is pretty solid. A strong majority of those players did not play in the AHL.

If you're talking about active NHLers who have played in an NHL All Star game (which is a fairly high bar to set. We're talking about the collective top 10% - 15%, or so, of NHLers) - I'd be surprised it less than 2/3s of them had spend time in the AHL.


Upper Deck has an AHL license, they do a set every year - and as far as I can tell, it's reasonably well broken. Not my thing... but if people want it, who am I to argue? (I own some singles from various year's AHL sets, but never bought so much as a pack).

I'm still not sure why we're talking about the pros & cons of an AHL set, in a thread that was about CHL SP Game Used.

[Savard18]

You mean like the anti-trust lawsuit that's ongoing?

Leaf and UD are already suing each other.......


And no, they don't have to simply bid. That assumes that the NHL (and PA) are looking for another company to sell the rights to.

The NHL has had Upper Deck as an exclusive rights holder for most of the last 15 years. There was a small window (2010, to 2014, I think?) when Panini had a license too. The NHL then reverted back to an exclusive deal with UD.

When you consider that all four major pro-team sports in North America have exclusive trading card deals, it's clearly not a "the NHLPA is short sighted" thing. It's that the leagues (or the PAs, and it's most likely the PAs) would rather deal with one manufacture than multiple manufactures. It's simpler for them.

Even in the hypothetical situation where the NHL & PA were looking to license another manufacturer.... I'm not sure Leaf would be #1 on the list (in fact, I think they probably would not be). I'm not sure they'd even be 2nd on the list. I'm not knocking their stuff at all.... I really like a lot of their products.... but if there is going to be a 2nd licensed manufacturer, I think both Topps and Panini stand better chances of getting that spot than Leaf.

And yeah.... as I think has been pointed out: This is a CHL set (i.e. Juniors. Players who have not been drafted). Upper Deck has had this license for a few years now, not Leaf. Same with the AHL. Leaf only has licensing from individual players.

Well I'm glad Leaf is involved in litigation with UD....

And yes, of course they bid but it's not like an ebay auction - it's more like buying a house.... It's not that simple, lol... And I highly doubt the NHLPA really cares who they're signing autographs for just as long as they get their money, lol....

Either way UD technically has a monopoly on the NHL when it comes to cards.... First off Leaf/ITGU has a valid lawsuit, now say it fails (which it wont) but say it does...... Now if I was a litigator for Leaf I would advise them to not sell hockey cards I would advise them to sell something else similar to cards, but they're really not sports cards.. They're decorations that just happen to look like hockey cards... I mean what is UD going to say? they own the concept of hockey players on a card?? lol....

UD has ZERO argument on this one, they're a monopoly so are the other brands that essentially "own" certain sports... I mean I thought we already set the precedent with the railroads?.. Of course this involves Canada as well hence Canadian law - which I don't know too much about but I would presume it's similar to US law when it comes to anti-trust litigation..

I'll say this much tho - when UD's exclusive rights contract is up, there will be other brands and product manufacturing cards again and absolutely Leaf/ITG will be one of them.... Look, I'm not trying to imply that Leaf/ITG will have exclusive rights - what I'm saying is that UD will be declared a monopoly and will no longer hold exclusive rights to the NHL, NHL players (NHLPA), teams or logo's....

Look, we broke up the railroads and they were colluding - this goes way beyond colluding - this is a straight up monopoly...I suppose we could argue collusion but it would be a terrible argument because it would only further prove that UD is a monopoly, lol.

I'm not a lawyer but I'm not entirely ignorant either - it's blatantly obvious that UD is a monopoly - and they're going to be broken up and I would bet anything UD is just trying to delay the lawsuit as long as they can.. Like I said I'm not a lawyer or litigator for that matter but I do know that under US law, if UD loses the case (which will absolutely happen) they will be forced to cover Leaf/ITG's litigation bills - so not only will UD lose their case but they will have to pay Leaf/ITG and all plaintiffs in this case lawyer fees.. UD could go bankrupt and be forced to sell off their "subsidiaries" like Parkhurst, SPGU, SPA or SP period....

And I'm looking at this from an objective position.... I mean it's not like we won't have hockey cards - they will exist but perhaps they will be under Fleer, Topps and Leaf again.... UD will still exist - they just won't have a monopoly anymore, lol.... That's all I'm saying from an objective standpoint - as someone that knows a little bit about United States IP laws and monopolies .

[Savard18]

This lookup is kind of biased against dmen, but a quick look at the top 25 scorers in this NHL for 19-20, 11 of them spent time in the AHL. Not all spent a long time there, but some time. 11/25 is not an insignificant percentage..... it's nearly half.

Most players don't jump from being drafted at 18, right into the NHL..... but they don't go to the AHL either. European teenagers are more likely to stay home for another couple of years, and North American ones that are playing Major Junior have to be sent back there, they can't be assigned to the AHL until they're 20. The college kids typically stay in school until they're ready to sign a contract, so they might play there for another couple of seasons.... or they sign right away, which means they've got a spot on the NHL team, or they sign the deal and play Major Junior.

Most NHLers spent time in the minors. Many stars did as well. I would agree with you that a majority of the top talent in the league don't play in the AHL, but it's a small majority.

I guess it depends on what level of "star" player you're talking about. If you're looking at active NHLers, who are already considered locks to be inducted into the HOF one day.... without looking it up, I'd suggest your point is pretty solid. A strong majority of those players did not play in the AHL.

If you're talking about active NHLers who have played in an NHL All Star game (which is a fairly high bar to set. We're talking about the collective top 10% - 15%, or so, of NHLers) - I'd be surprised it less than 2/3s of them had spend time in the AHL.


Upper Deck has an AHL license, they do a set every year - and as far as I can tell, it's reasonably well broken. Not my thing... but if people want it, who am I to argue? (I own some singles from various year's AHL sets, but never bought so much as a pack).

I'm still not sure why we're talking about the pros & cons of an AHL set, in a thread that was about CHL SP Game Used.

Well, I agree with you... Look, some players do spend time in the AHL at some point be it development or conditioning - but if it's development the chases of that player going to the NHL and being being a "star" is slim to none and i understand that "star" is subjective but for sake of my argument lets just say a "star" is a 2nd line scorer or 2-way elite player or a top 4 defenseman or perhaps a #5 that can step in and play top 4 minutes if someone gets injured...

As far as how the system works - I know all about it - so you really don't have to tell me, lol...however it may help those reading this thread.

Look, a first round pick will have every opportunity and will be favored for a roster spot - they will be given their 9 games to "prove themselves" and if the team feels said payer isn't ready for the NHL then they go back to juniors but rarely do I see a forward first round pick developing in the AHL, because by the time they're 20 they should be NHL ready... But I admit it happens and sometimes there are some "late bloomers".. TBH, I think if you're good enough to play in the NHL and you don't succeed then you're not playing with the right linemates - that or the franchise, and what they're looking for as far as style of play and role just isn't a good fit for the player.. One of my buddies I grew up with and played ball against is a pretty successful MLB ball player and he was in that situation, he got traded and he went from night to day- even from a confidence level or psychological level - he just changed - he was thinking about giving up baseball, and as someone that grew up with him - I told him he better not and now he's played in a couple of All-Star games, but yea - my point is that changes can be good - look and Dylan Strome for example - I mean he was on the verge of being a "bust" but he got traded and turned his career around.....

My point is that yea, sometimes young talent will get demoted - and I'm not saying the AHL won't deliver stars but what I am saying is that if a player needs to develop in the AHL the likelihood of that player going on to be a star is really low - goalies excluded of course - goaltenders always go through the AHL because it's part of their developmental process....

So yea, I agree with you...

As far as AHL cards? lol I don't foresee me ever buying a pack - ever, lol.... I mean if I was an AHL fan I would but I an NHL fan... Look I know some AHL players are fantastic - Patrick Sharp really sticks out when he was with the Phantoms and went to the finals during the NHL lockout - I was really impressed by him and almost fell out of my chair when the Hawks acquired him... I even remember the headline: "Hawks Make Sharp Move" .. Of course Hawks fans were like "why are you so excited? this is just a minor move" - of course I was like "this dude is going to be an NHL star for a very long time" - of course I got laughed at, just like I was lauged at when I said Duncan Keith would win a Norris Trophy one day back in or around 2006-07 - hey Duncan Keith played in the AHL too with Norfolk.. So I can point out when I'm wrong... but hey 15 years later and Dunc's is a first ballot Hall of Famer, with 2 Norris Trophies, 3 Cups, 2 OLY Golds and a Conn Smythe, LMAO... And he wss a 2nd round pick.... I think Keith is the perfect example of a payer that actually reaches his ceiling.... But you know what? I really think the first lockout really helped younger players - because they did play in the AHL and got another year of development out of it.....

[30ranfordfan]

Well I'm glad Leaf is involved in litigation with UD....

And yes, of course they bid but it's not like an ebay auction - it's more like buying a house.... It's not that simple, lol... And I highly doubt the NHLPA really cares who they're signing autographs for just as long as they get their money, lol....

Either way UD technically has a monopoly on the NHL when it comes to cards.... First off Leaf/ITGU has a valid lawsuit, now say it fails (which it wont) but say it does...... Now if I was a litigator for Leaf I would advise them to not sell hockey cards I would advise them to sell something else similar to cards, but they're really not sports cards.. They're decorations that just happen to look like hockey cards... I mean what is UD going to say? they own the concept of hockey players on a card?? lol....

UD has ZERO argument on this one, they're a monopoly so are the other brands that essentially "own" certain sports... I mean I thought we already set the precedent with the railroads?.. Of course this involves Canada as well hence Canadian law - which I don't know too much about but I would presume it's similar to US law when it comes to anti-trust litigation..

I'll say this much tho - when UD's exclusive rights contract is up, there will be other brands and product manufacturing cards again and absolutely Leaf/ITG will be one of them.... Look, I'm not trying to imply that Leaf/ITG will have exclusive rights - what I'm saying is that UD will be declared a monopoly and will no longer hold exclusive rights to the NHL, NHL players (NHLPA), teams or logo's....

Look, we broke up the railroads and they were colluding - this goes way beyond colluding - this is a straight up monopoly...I suppose we could argue collusion but it would be a terrible argument because it would only further prove that UD is a monopoly, lol.

I'm not a lawyer but I'm not entirely ignorant either - it's blatantly obvious that UD is a monopoly - and they're going to be broken up and I would bet anything UD is just trying to delay the lawsuit as long as they can.. Like I said I'm not a lawyer or litigator for that matter but I do know that under US law, if UD loses the case (which will absolutely happen) they will be forced to cover Leaf/ITG's litigation bills - so not only will UD lose their case but they will have to pay Leaf/ITG and all plaintiffs in this case lawyer fees.. UD could go bankrupt and be forced to sell off their "subsidiaries" like Parkhurst, SPGU, SPA or SP period....

And I'm looking at this from an objective position.... I mean it's not like we won't have hockey cards - they will exist but perhaps they will be under Fleer, Topps and Leaf again.... UD will still exist - they just won't have a monopoly anymore, lol.... That's all I'm saying from an objective standpoint - as someone that knows a little bit about United States IP laws and monopolies .

Well, don't want to burst your bubble here.... but the lawsuit has nothing to do with UD's exclusive rights to making licensed NHL trading cards.

If you know much about IP laws, and monopolies - you know that such a law suit wouldn't have a leg to stand on. Upper Deck is not preventing anyone else from making trading cards. Heck, they're not even preventing anyone else from becoming a licensed manufacturer, outside of the fact that they currently have an exclusive deal with with NHL/PA (I think two more years to go? I might be wrong).

The NHL owns a bunch of trademarks (logos). The Players are part of Group Licensing though the PA. They can sell usage of those trademarks & licensing to whomever they want. Think about it. If you & I enter into a contract, where I pay you a bunch of money to sell photographs of you.... that doesn't give anyone else the right to do it, and there is no reason to compel you to sell those same rights to anyone else.

There's a couple of lawsuits. I believe UD actually got the ball rolling. They're seeking damages from Leaf, as they claim Leaf's continued manufacturing of unlicensed hockey cards damages their brand... and Leaf's signing of NHL players to exclusive autograph contracts further damages them, and devalues the exclusive agreement they have with the NHL & PA. Not sure if anyone has reminded them that they continue to make unlicensed cards for all other sports, and have athletes from all sports signed to exclusive autograph contracts, despite not holding a license for that league.

I have a hard time believing they'll win, but I'm no expert.

Leaf has counter sued them. It has nothing to do with the exclusive rights, but distribution, and strong-arm tactics. My understanding is that the major distributors of Upper Deck product are forbidden from also distributing Leaf. i.e. "If you move their product, we'll find someone else to move ours". Furthermore, Upper Deck "diamond dealers" are not allowed to carry Leaf hockey products, or they risk their diamond dealer status being pulled. That gives them early access to products.

I suspect Leaf does have a good case there, but again.... I'm no expert.

In my opinion, more licensees would be a good thing. Upper Deck would make better products if they had competition. They did that while Panini was involved. Then Panini was pushed out, and UD started to get progressively lazier.

From things I've read over the years, I get the sense that it's actually the PA, and not the league, that is really high on exclusive deals. It gives them one company to deal with, and it makes things simpler. When the current agreement is up, I think it's more like that Upper Deck gets replaced with someone else (Topps or Panini) and they would now be the exclusive, than it is a 2nd (or 3rd, 4th, etc) actually joins the fold.

I would love to see Leaf get an NHL license, but I just don't see it happening. They don't really need to. My impression is they're doing fine as they are right now.

Well, I agree with you... Look, some players do spend time in the AHL at some point be it development or conditioning - but if it's development the chases of that player going to the NHL and being being a "star" is slim to none and i understand that "star" is subjective but for sake of my argument lets just say a "star" is a 2nd line scorer or 2-way elite player or a top 4 defenseman or perhaps a #5 that can step in and play top 4 minutes if someone gets injured...

As far as how the system works - I know all about it - so you really don't have to tell me, lol...however it may help those reading this thread.

Look, a first round pick will have every opportunity and will be favored for a roster spot - they will be given their 9 games to "prove themselves" and if the team feels said payer isn't ready for the NHL then they go back to juniors but rarely do I see a forward first round pick developing in the AHL, because by the time they're 20 they should be NHL ready... But I admit it happens and sometimes there are some "late bloomers".. TBH, I think if you're good enough to play in the NHL and you don't succeed then you're not playing with the right linemates - that or the franchise, and what they're looking for as far as style of play and role just isn't a good fit for the player.. One of my buddies I grew up with and played ball against is a pretty successful MLB ball player and he was in that situation, he got traded and he went from night to day- even from a confidence level or psychological level - he just changed - he was thinking about giving up baseball, and as someone that grew up with him - I told him he better not and now he's played in a couple of All-Star games, but yea - my point is that changes can be good - look and Dylan Strome for example - I mean he was on the verge of being a "bust" but he got traded and turned his career around.....

My point is that yea, sometimes young talent will get demoted - and I'm not saying the AHL won't deliver stars but what I am saying is that if a player needs to develop in the AHL the likelihood of that player going on to be a star is really low - goalies excluded of course - goaltenders always go through the AHL because it's part of their developmental process....

So yea, I agree with you...

As far as AHL cards? lol I don't foresee me ever buying a pack - ever, lol.... I mean if I was an AHL fan I would but I an NHL fan... Look I know some AHL players are fantastic - Patrick Sharp really sticks out when he was with the Phantoms and went to the finals during the NHL lockout - I was really impressed by him and almost fell out of my chair when the Hawks acquired him... I even remember the headline: "Hawks Make Sharp Move" .. Of course Hawks fans were like "why are you so excited? this is just a minor move" - of course I was like "this dude is going to be an NHL star for a very long time" - of course I got laughed at, just like I was lauged at when I said Duncan Keith would win a Norris Trophy one day back in or around 2006-07 - hey Duncan Keith played in the AHL too with Norfolk.. So I can point out when I'm wrong... but hey 15 years later and Dunc's is a first ballot Hall of Famer, with 2 Norris Trophies, 3 Cups, 2 OLY Golds and a Conn Smythe, LMAO... And he wss a 2nd round pick.... I think Keith is the perfect example of a payer that actually reaches his ceiling.... But you know what? I really think the first lockout really helped younger players - because they did play in the AHL and got another year of development out of it.....

Sure, star is a subjective term.... but again I'll point out: 11 of the top 25 scorers in this past season (all of which, should be considered stars) played some time in the AHL. Not all of them played a lot, but they played.

You poo-poo'd on the idea of an AHL set, because the AHL doesn't have the talent. The truth is, a majority of NHL players that most consider to be "stars" played in the AHL... and thus could have been included in an AHL set at somepoint.

Let's use the 2015 Stanley Cup Champions as an example (I'm just going with a roster that was very good, and I think you'll be familiar with).

We all know that neither Kane nor Toews played in the AHL. Most would agree that those were their best two players in 2015. Certainly the "biggest names". So in that sense, no... the top-end talent didn't play in the AHL.

These players, I would all have assigned the subjective term "star" to: Hossa, Keith, Saad, Sharp, Richards, Seabrook, Crawford.

I realize I've left out some good names, but like you said... it's subjective, and those are the guys I'd call stars (yeah, Richards was way past his prime).

Keith, Saad, Sharp, Seabrook, and Crawford all played in the AHL at some point. If I include Towes & Kane, I've subjectively tagged a group of 9 guys and called them "stars". 5 played in the AHL.

I don't think that playing in the AHL negatively impacts a player's ability to be a star in the NHL, at all. It's simply a reflection of the fact that they're not quite ready at 20 years of age.

Again, 11 of the top 25 scorers in the NHL this season, spent time in the AHL. These are all guys that didn't come into their own until after the age of 20, are playing top line minutes today, and are star players by any measure.

[MR.M's Cards]

@Savard18 it has been pointed out to you many times but you haven't acknowledged it yet, but you do know that this thread and the set that is being talked about are not AHL right?